Obama Ratifies Bush
The Administration embraces military tribunals at Gitmo.

No one has done more to revive the reputation of Bush-era antiterror policies than the Obama Administration. In its latest policy reversal, yesterday Mr. Obama said the U.S. would resume the military tribunals for Guantanamo terrorists that he unilaterally suspended two years ago, and he may even begin referring new charges to military commissions within days or weeks.

The political left is enraged by what it claims is a betrayal, but we're glad to see Mr. Obama bowing to security reality and erring on the side of keeping the country safewith one exception, about which more below.

On a conference call yesterday, senior Administration officials tried to sell their military commissions process as more "credible" than Mr. Bush's, but their policy changes are de minimis. In 2009, Congress made technical reforms for handling testimony and classified information. By executive order, a new panel will now also conduct a "periodic review" of detentions. But the bipartisan Military Commissions Act of 2006, or MCA, had already included "administrative review boards" dedicated to the same goal.

snip-

The real news here is the final repudiation of Attorney General Eric Holder's attempt to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and other 9/11 plotters as criminal defendants on U.S. soil. The killers at Guantanamo will now be brought to justice via a process that the President once depicted as akin to the Ministry of Love in "1984." On the campaign trail in 2008, Mr. Obama claimed that Mr. Bush "runs prisons which lock people away without ever telling them why they're there or what they're charged with."

In an August 2007 speech that his advisers touted at the time, Mr. Obama promised to repeal this "legal framework that does not work." He even claimed that Bush policies undermined "our Constitution and our freedom" and that the Bush Administration had pressed a "false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we demand," a line he recycled in his Inaugural Address. He went out of his way to vote against the Military Commissions Act.

So much for all that.

Yesterday the senior Administration officials even praised the "bipartisan effort" that produced that law. They're right. The MCA was a serious and painstaking compromise under the constitutional guidance of the Supreme Court's Hamdan decision, but the anti-antiterror lobbyincluding candidate Obamamaintained it was an affront to American values. The real test of Mr. Obama's new maturity will be if he puts the guts back into the tribunal process, restoring the funding and talent necessary to handle complex prosecutions that have been lost over the years amid the assault on Gitmo.

Obama Ratifies Bush
The Administration embraces military tribunals at Gitmo.

No one has done more to revive the reputation of Bush-era antiterror policies than the Obama Administration. In its latest policy reversal, yesterday Mr. Obama said the U.S. would resume the military tribunals for Guantanamo terrorists that he unilaterally suspended two years ago, and he may even begin referring new charges to military commissions within days or weeks.

The political left is enraged by what it claims is a betrayal, but we're glad to see Mr. Obama bowing to security reality and erring on the side of keeping the country safewith one exception, about which more below.

On a conference call yesterday, senior Administration officials tried to sell their military commissions process as more "credible" than Mr. Bush's, but their policy changes are de minimis. In 2009, Congress made technical reforms for handling testimony and classified information. By executive order, a new panel will now also conduct a "periodic review" of detentions. But the bipartisan Military Commissions Act of 2006, or MCA, had already included "administrative review boards" dedicated to the same goal.

snip-

The real news here is the final repudiation of Attorney General Eric Holder's attempt to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and other 9/11 plotters as criminal defendants on U.S. soil. The killers at Guantanamo will now be brought to justice via a process that the President once depicted as akin to the Ministry of Love in "1984." On the campaign trail in 2008, Mr. Obama claimed that Mr. Bush "runs prisons which lock people away without ever telling them why they're there or what they're charged with."

In an August 2007 speech that his advisers touted at the time, Mr. Obama promised to repeal this "legal framework that does not work." He even claimed that Bush policies undermined "our Constitution and our freedom" and that the Bush Administration had pressed a "false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we demand," a line he recycled in his Inaugural Address. He went out of his way to vote against the Military Commissions Act.

So much for all that.

Yesterday the senior Administration officials even praised the "bipartisan effort" that produced that law. They're right. The MCA was a serious and painstaking compromise under the constitutional guidance of the Supreme Court's Hamdan decision, but the anti-antiterror lobbyincluding candidate Obamamaintained it was an affront to American values. The real test of Mr. Obama's new maturity will be if he puts the guts back into the tribunal process, restoring the funding and talent necessary to handle complex prosecutions that have been lost over the years amid the assault on Gitmo.

There are a lot of things Obama does with which I totally disagree. The OP lists a number of them. Not everyone knows that rendition is still going on. It took an animal to begin this barbaric practice and I am extremely disappointed that Obama is continuing it.

There are a lot of things Obama does with which I totally disagree. The OP lists a number of them. Not everyone knows that rendition is still going on. It took an animal to begin this barbaric practice and I am extremely disappointed that Obama is continuing it.

We could have done better.

Click to expand...

Hummm, really? in what context? And I don't mean that flippantly....

As rendition for the purpose of torture goes, I see it as the ulitmnate hypocrisy, we'll contract out our bloody work but won't do it here and then claim we don't toture, thats BS.

That being said, that why I have no issue with say, water baording as long as its authorized by exec. order only.

As far as rendition as a short term holding place to keep folks from the mitts of lawyers or even knowledge that we have them, yea I am down with that, I won't make any bones about it.

There are a lot of things Obama does with which I totally disagree. The OP lists a number of them. Not everyone knows that rendition is still going on. It took an animal to begin this barbaric practice and I am extremely disappointed that Obama is continuing it.

That being said, that why I have no issue with say, water baording as long as its authorized by exec. order only.

Click to expand...

I have a HUGE issue with water boarding. I believe that it is torture. I see no difference between water boarding, and putting a gas mask on someone who is tied to a chair, and then shutting off the air supply. I know there are a lot here who do not view this as torture. I do.

As far as rendition as a short term holding place to keep folks from the mitts of lawyers or even knowledge that we have them, yea I am down with that, I won't make any bones about it.

Click to expand...

How "short term" are we talking? And, I assume, there would be no torturing going on during the "short term" - merely a holding place, right? Why do that in the first place? Are you suggesting hiding suspects out somewhere pending trial? Why?

I have never understood this reluctance of people to give trials to those accused of crime.

There are a lot of things Obama does with which I totally disagree. The OP lists a number of them. Not everyone knows that rendition is still going on. It took an animal to begin this barbaric practice and I am extremely disappointed that Obama is continuing it.

We could have done better.

Click to expand...

Obviously, in the context of who we elected as our president. I think Hilary would have done a much better job than Obama. I was a Hilary supporter from the start.

Click to expand...

Frankly at is point, I would take Bill, and let me tell you, from me, thats a concession.

Its 3:00am and the phone is ringing, get me a Clinton on the line.

Agree completely. That is not to say that we SHOULD start doing it here, on our own. It shouldn't be done at all - by anyone.

Click to expand...

well, we differ on that.

I have a HUGE issue with water boarding. I believe that it is torture. I see no difference between water boarding, and putting a gas mask on someone who is tied to a chair, and then shutting off the air supply. I know there are a lot here who do not view this as torture. I do.

Click to expand...

we will have to disagree again. I think its a benign form of torture, I know that sounds like hedging but what can i say? We don't use it for the same reasons and the way, say the Japanese did.

As far as rendition as a short term holding place to keep folks from the mitts of lawyers or even knowledge that we have them, yea I am down with that, I won't make any bones about it.

Click to expand...

How "short term" are we talking? And, I assume, there would be no torturing going on during the "short term" - merely a holding place, right? Why do that in the first place? Are you suggesting hiding suspects out somewhere pending trial? Why?

I have never understood this reluctance of people to give trials to those accused of crime.

Click to expand...

If we had to snatch someone to keep them from perpetrating an event or yes for evidence sake and had to keep everyone in the dark ala the enemy in limbo and doubt as to their status, who took them where they were, dead? fled? etc....I'd say 60 days would be the limit. No torture, just tucked away.

Useful Searches

About USMessageBoard.com

USMessageBoard.com was founded in 2003 with the intent of allowing all voices to be heard. With a wildly diverse community from all sides of the political spectrum, USMessageBoard.com continues to build on that tradition. We welcome everyone despite political and/or religious beliefs, and we continue to encourage the right to free speech.

Come on in and join the discussion. Thank you for stopping by USMessageBoard.com!